From: Douglas Gregor (doug.gregor_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-07 06:58:01
Tony Juricic wrote:
> Aaron W. LaFramboise wrote:
>> Over the past few years, the style of our abstract interfaces for
>> system-dependent features has bothered me more and more.
> > [cut]
> Since thread library was the first boost library that I tried to use,
> right after I "discovered" boost++, I can not agree with you more. My
> take on it is that people simply don't use it. IMO, current thread
> library is an old, in those times politically correct, hommage to Java
> thread classes but in C++.
> Some past discussion regarding IMO useless thread-specific ptr
> indicated to me that people involved with threads are either doing
> something with threads that is way past my capabilities to understand,
> or that they are simply playing 'syntactic games' since they don't
> really use threads except maybe to construe material for magazine
> aricles and useless trivial examples.
Tone it down. If you think the design of a particular library could be
improved, then provide some constructive criticism. If you're only here
to rant, take it elsewhere.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk